What question did this study set out to answer?

To describe clinicians’ encounters with end-of-life dreams, their preparedness, and educational approaches.

June 26, 2026Journal of Palliative Medicine0 citations

Understanding Clinicians’ Perspectives on End-of-Life Dreams and Visions: An International Survey

MHMuhammad Hamza Habib LFLaura Fontanesi ZMZainab Motiwala

Key Points

To describe clinicians’ encounters with end-of-life dreams, their preparedness, and educational approaches.
Conducted an international survey of health care professionals caring for patients with serious illness.
Survey included 30 items across 7 sections following established reporting guidelines.
Utilized structured multimodal dissemination for diverse participant engagement.
247 participants engaged in the survey and reported frequent encounters with end-of-life dreams.
Participants noted positive effects on patients more than negative effects (W = 446.0, p < 0.001, r = 0.64).
Identified significant clinical challenges, including lack of institutional protocols and standardized criteria, urging for multidisciplinary involvement.

Abstract

Background: End-of-life dreams and visions (ELDVs) are vivid, often subjective experiences that occur during the dying process. Even though the patient and family experiences of ELDVs are well documented, there is limited knowledge regarding the perspectives, preparedness, and perceived needs of health care professionals. ELDVs also remain insufficiently addressed in clinical care. Objective: To describe how frequently clinicians encounter ELDVs, perceived preparedness/training, and approaches to clinician and family education and communication. Methods: We conducted a survey to explore health care professional’s perspectives and experiences surrounding ELDVs. The Checklist for Reporting Results of internet E-Surveys was followed. Our survey included 30 items across 7 sections. Professionals that take care of patients with serious or terminal illness were eligible for the study. We utilized a structured multimodal dissemination to achieve maximum diversity in participants. Results: Briefly, 247 participants were eligible for analysis. Frequent encounters for ELDVs were reported by participants. Participants perceived positive effects on patients more frequently than negative effects (W = 446.0, p < 0.001, r = 0.64). Clinical challenges were rated differently across categories (χ 2 = 160.97, p < 0.001, Kendall’s W = 0.13). The most commonly endorsed clinical challenges were lack of institutional protocols and lack of standardized diagnostic criteria, both rated significantly higher than all other challenges (Bonferroni-corrected Wilcoxon tests: All p < 0.001). Participants endorsed multidisciplinary involvement and formal policy implementation. Conclusion: ELDVs are common, but clinicians feel underprepared to respond to them. There is a need for structured training and institutional protocols. Future studies should include patients and their families and analyze how their experiences are shaped by physician responses.

问 AI

Bookmark

View Full Paper